I agree. He no longer stood out to me as an important player. So you reward him with multiple years? That’s kind of like Ching down here in Houston. I thought he was ready for retirement after 2011, and we signed him up through 2013. Rumor is he may fulfill it. So when Carr is out and we still don’t have many options beyond Bruin, we can thank this lengthy victory lap. The irony being that re-signing Ching was supposed to be the bridge back to the cup-winner teams, except it arguably prevents progress to a next championship.

Pure nostalgia. I’m not big on sentimental signings. Based on what Segares did I’d cash my chips in and find someone else. To people who imply there’s no replacement, there are plenty of backs flying around in trades and what passes for free agency. It’s the GM’s job to identify the replacements, and whether or not some schmo on the internet can rattle off a list of qualified choices can often be an excuse for defending a mediocre status quo.

i think you are under estimating segares’ level of play. he’s only 30, so it’s not like he’s over the hill. and while this was based on one man’s ratings, chicago fire confidential gave him a compiled game rating of 5.61 over the course of the year. i imagine that this whole process was to lower his salary too, so i think it’s a positive move for the team and the player.

i do think if you let him go, asking who would replace him is a very valid question. but that’s cool we disagree on everything.

Personal experience plus viewing experience actually tends to suggest to me that 30 is where you crest the hill physically.

Grades, whatever man, we played Chicago in the playoffs and regular season, and he did not impress like he used to.

I agree that as an overall process improving the team with personnel moves is the idea. If you drop Segares you should acquire someone better. But IMO at $200K + you could do better or at least cheaper very easily. Half the reason he’s getting crammed down is he no longer looks like a stud defender.

Far as replacements goes, my experience is the internet game of “who replaces” is a status quo defense, I start giving suggestions which you then dismiss as unqualified, too good for us, or too expensive. No one’s worthy except the mediocrity people already want to replace, the present is somehow exactly how it should be even if Houston ran you out of the playoffs round 1 and the player in question didn’t impress during it.

So I think it’s more useful to sit back and watch the process go and evaluate the GM based on who they bring in and what they eventually do, and if they miss out on anyone obvious. Cause, for example, in Houston’s case, the best CB in town (Taylor) was a random trialist in the spring who took more than a year to supplant status quo darling Andre Hainault. He costs $60K — half as much — and lacked Hainault’s European CV. But in reality he’s a superior player and you wouldn’t have known it til you watched him play.

He has played over 200 games for Fire. He brings experience and offense to the young back line. He is a stand up guy off the field. He is one of the most consistent left sided players in the league. I don’t understand the criticism . He’s in decline but that’s why they have Kinney, Berry, and Anibaba. He’s not that dirty of a player either. If you want dirty go see mr. Gargan.

Gonzo is a core player, who represents the Fire very well on and off the field. Gets up the field to push on O, while still handling his defensive responsibilities. On D, Gargan is hard working player, damn good heart, when not hurt, but not that skilled and not a natural left back. Arne is obviously the stud vet, but going into his last year (probably). The rest of the D corp is very talented, but of limited experience. There aren’t that many left backs around the league. This is a no-brainer for a club on the cusp of being a serious threat in this league.